Are you all really paying $30 an hour for a good nanny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

And by the way, I’m not sure why friends are in quotes. These are the loveliest, most caring people I know, even if they aren’t particularly ambitious. MUCH nicer than the tools I met in law school and at firms here in DC. Just sayin’

It is really quite uncommon that someone with a law degree and 10 years of experience in Manhattan makes 40K. It's, like, unheard of. This was my starting salary out of grad school in 2001, in a humanities major. Something is fishy.

My starting salary in Manhattan in 2000 with a degree from u of Chicago was 27k. This was at Bozell, a large marketing firm.

The year 2000 was 22 years ago so I do not understand how this is relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

But corporate America gets away with extorting them and nobody cares, that’s my point. While we sit here debating how much an individual nanny employed by a family should make, big companies are laughing their way to the bank for millions of people like my friends. It’s really unfair.

You apparently have a law degree - perhaps you should go back and and review your Crim Law notes on what constitutes "extortion." Here's a hint - it does not include low pay to underachievers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

But corporate America gets away with extorting them and nobody cares, that’s my point. While we sit here debating how much an individual nanny employed by a family should make, big companies are laughing their way to the bank for millions of people like my friends. It’s really unfair.

You apparently have a law degree - perhaps you should go back and and review your Crim Law notes on what constitutes "extortion." Here's a hint - it does not include low pay to underachievers.

So you agree that corporate America paying $30k to start with a degree and COLAs is totally fine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

And by the way, I’m not sure why friends are in quotes. These are the loveliest, most caring people I know, even if they aren’t particularly ambitious. MUCH nicer than the tools I met in law school and at firms here in DC. Just sayin’

It is really quite uncommon that someone with a law degree and 10 years of experience in Manhattan makes 40K. It's, like, unheard of. This was my starting salary out of grad school in 2001, in a humanities major. Something is fishy.

I don’t make $40k I’m talking about my friends. Why is this hard to understand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

My best friend got a promotion recently from $42k to $45k. She graduated in 2011 and has been working for a large media syndicate in Manhattan for a decade. She is clearly not an underachiever. My point in posting this is that I believe that some people are truly out of touch with what corporations are paying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

But corporate America gets away with extorting them and nobody cares, that’s my point. While we sit here debating how much an individual nanny employed by a family should make, big companies are laughing their way to the bank for millions of people like my friends. It’s really unfair.

You apparently have a law degree - perhaps you should go back and and review your Crim Law notes on what constitutes "extortion." Here's a hint - it does not include low pay to underachievers.

Also, in the event that you’re also a lawyer, I guess you don’t have any friends from law school who do public interest work because if you did then you’d know that they make ~$60k and are certainly not “underachievers”. They do the important work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

C’mon. You can make $40k working for Target. If you’re a college educated person let alone with advanced degrees working for $40k in Manhattan you’re a moron.

Fed salary out of law school 50 k tops out if you are lucky and a supervisor at 175 k. Does not make sense to pay your nanny about what you make. We pay ours $20 an hour about 6 weeks paid leave never doc pay for sick days and nice bonus live in dc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

My best friend got a promotion recently from $42k to $45k. She graduated in 2011 and has been working for a large media syndicate in Manhattan for a decade. She is clearly not an underachiever. My point in posting this is that I believe that some people are truly out of touch with what corporations are paying.

Maybe your friend should become a nanny. I was previously making 85k in Los Angeles and just took a new jobs for 110k. I have Pto, sick days, holidays, medical, dental, vision and a 401k.

- nanny

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

My best friend got a promotion recently from $42k to $45k. She graduated in 2011 and has been working for a large media syndicate in Manhattan for a decade. She is clearly not an underachiever. My point in posting this is that I believe that some people are truly out of touch with what corporations are paying.

Maybe your friend should become a nanny. I was previously making 85k in Los Angeles and just took a new jobs for 110k. I have Pto, sick days, holidays, medical, dental, vision and a 401k.

- nanny

I’m the poster you’re replying too and, wow, that’s wild. God bless, though! I’m curious to know what type of work your employers do? If you’re in LA are they in the arts? Or sales people that W2 over a million a year with commission? Because otherwise I do wonder who would decide to hire childcare for ~$150k/year (including taxes, benefits package, etc.) when that’s just roughly about the take home pay of someone making over $200,000/year. How many kids do you care for? Sorry for all the questions I’m just genuinely curious haha.

If that’s the kind of pay folks can command around here then, well, I should have been a nanny too instead of going to law school 🙃. Who knew! I still stand by my point that corporations don’t pay enough though, which is what I think fuels the debate over what is the right amount to pay for childcare. It’s just frustrating.

[Anonymous]

Just consider what it costs when your children get subpar care (unstable, incompetent or unloving) — a lifetime of trying to compensate.

Sad, sad, sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

My best friend got a promotion recently from $42k to $45k. She graduated in 2011 and has been working for a large media syndicate in Manhattan for a decade. She is clearly not an underachiever. My point in posting this is that I believe that some people are truly out of touch with what corporations are paying.

Maybe your friend should become a nanny. I was previously making 85k in Los Angeles and just took a new jobs for 110k. I have Pto, sick days, holidays, medical, dental, vision and a 401k.

- nanny

I’m the poster you’re replying too and, wow, that’s wild. God bless, though! I’m curious to know what type of work your employers do? If you’re in LA are they in the arts? Or sales people that W2 over a million a year with commission? Because otherwise I do wonder who would decide to hire childcare for ~$150k/year (including taxes, benefits package, etc.) when that’s just roughly about the take home pay of someone making over $200,000/year. How many kids do you care for? Sorry for all the questions I’m just genuinely curious haha.

If that’s the kind of pay folks can command around here then, well, I should have been a nanny too instead of going to law school 🙃. Who knew! I still stand by my point that corporations don’t pay enough though, which is what I think fuels the debate over what is the right amount to pay for childcare. It’s just frustrating.

How about a live-in nanny at $65k per year: 3 weeks vacation, unlimited sick, $350/month health, no housing or food cost? Again, you made your choices, others made theirs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

No offense, but your friends aren't very good at their jobs. A couple of them might have taken a low-paying job because of possibly equity, great experience or other large payouts, but many simply aren't in demand. Also, when the second assistant to the deputy VP screws up, there are no real consequences. When a nanny does, there potentially are.

My best friend got a promotion recently from $42k to $45k. She graduated in 2011 and has been working for a large media syndicate in Manhattan for a decade. She is clearly not an underachiever. My point in posting this is that I believe that some people are truly out of touch with what corporations are paying.

Maybe your friend should become a nanny. I was previously making 85k in Los Angeles and just took a new jobs for 110k. I have Pto, sick days, holidays, medical, dental, vision and a 401k.

- nanny

I’m the poster you’re replying too and, wow, that’s wild. God bless, though! I’m curious to know what type of work your employers do? If you’re in LA are they in the arts? Or sales people that W2 over a million a year with commission? Because otherwise I do wonder who would decide to hire childcare for ~$150k/year (including taxes, benefits package, etc.) when that’s just roughly about the take home pay of someone making over $200,000/year. How many kids do you care for? Sorry for all the questions I’m just genuinely curious haha.

If that’s the kind of pay folks can command around here then, well, I should have been a nanny too instead of going to law school 🙃. Who knew! I still stand by my point that corporations don’t pay enough though, which is what I think fuels the debate over what is the right amount to pay for childcare. It’s just frustrating.

How about a live-in nanny at $65k per year: 3 weeks vacation, unlimited sick, $350/month health, no housing or food cost? Again, you made your choices, others made theirs.

No that’s cool! I don’t really care what other families pay or what individual nannies make. I think lots of different things work for different people. I just take issue with folks who say that $50k for a nanny isn’t a living wage or is inherently exploitative when I have plenty of 30-something friends working for big companies and raising a family on less than that amount in the high-cost NY metro area. I’m just trying to explain that $50k isn’t an abysmal amount to be paid as a nanny when compared to what some salaries are for office jobs requiring a degree and experience (which, yes, is something that I have heard over and over on DCUM). That’s all. But if you make a bunch, that’s great! I’m not mad about it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

And by the way, I’m not sure why friends are in quotes. These are the loveliest, most caring people I know, even if they aren’t particularly ambitious. MUCH nicer than the tools I met in law school and at firms here in DC. Just sayin’

Because I don’t believe you know that many adults with degrees still making $40k that many years out of school. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people are so indignant about nanny pay, but I’m 32 years old and the majority of my college-educated friends make $40k a year working for tech companies, unions, media conglomerates, etc. With 10 years of post-grad experience and in MANHATTAN. And I know plenty of people with law degrees or other advanced degrees who make less than $60k/year. So, yeah. Why is one ok but not the other?

It’s not OK. Your “friends” are EXTREME underachievers.

And by the way, I’m not sure why friends are in quotes. These are the loveliest, most caring people I know, even if they aren’t particularly ambitious. MUCH nicer than the tools I met in law school and at firms here in DC. Just sayin’

It is really quite uncommon that someone with a law degree and 10 years of experience in Manhattan makes 40K. It's, like, unheard of. This was my starting salary out of grad school in 2001, in a humanities major. Something is fishy.

My starting salary in Manhattan in 2000 with a degree from u of Chicago was 27k. This was at Bozell, a large marketing firm.

The year 2000 was 22 years ago so I do not understand how this is relevant.

Thank you.